In the current economically strained situation, companies face a complex challenge: on the one hand, they need to hold back on investments due to uncertain market developments and rising costs, while on the other hand, they are forced to optimize their structures, drive digital transformations, and become more agile to remain competitive in the long term. Additionally, there is the challenge of employee retention and recruitment. The competition for qualified professionals is more intense than ever, while companies are simultaneously striving to keep their existing workforce productive and motivated. But how can companies ensure the productivity of their teams when resources are scarce and workloads are high? A crucial component is providing the right digital tools so that employees can perform their tasks efficiently and with a high level of motivation.
In this tension between cost reduction, digital transformation, and maintaining employee satisfaction, outsourcing can be a sensible solution. “As a Service” models, such as Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) or Infrastructure-as-a-Service (IaaS), or AV as a Service (AVaaS), offer companies the flexibility to scale necessary technological resources as needed without having to make high initial investments. These models enable companies to efficiently outsource their AV and IT infrastructure, software solutions, or even certain business processes, allowing them to focus their resources on strategic tasks. This way, companies can not only reduce costs but also respond more quickly to changes and drive their digital transformation.
The procurement and integration of audio-visual technology (AV technology) is an essential part of IT and infrastructure planning for companies and organizations. In recent years, there has already been a shift in procurement models: companies are increasingly faced with the decision of whether to purchase and integrate AV technology traditionally or to opt for modern “as a Service” models, where hardware, software, and services are provided flexibly. In this article, we want to compare the two models and highlight their respective advantages and disadvantages.
Traditional project approach for procuring AV technology
The traditional approach typically involves a one-time procurement and installation of AV technology. Companies determine a fixed need, purchase the required hardware and software, and integrate it into their existing infrastructure.
Advantages:
- Full control and ownership: After acquisition, the technology belongs to the company. It has unrestricted access to the devices and can use them as desired.
- Long lifespan: Devices are often used for several years, which, with proper maintenance, represents a good investment.
- Individual planning: The traditional model allows customized solutions that can be tailored exactly to the company’s requirements.
Disadvantages:
- High initial investment: The acquisition costs for hardware and software can be significant, leading to high capital binding.
- Maintenance and upgrades: The company is responsible for regular maintenance and updates of the technology, which incurs additional resources and costs.
- Scalability: If needs change or additional devices are required, the company must make further investments and possibly adapt the existing infrastructure.
“as a Service” contracts: Flexibility and risk minimisation
In contrast, the “as a Service” model involves companies obtaining AV technology as a service from a provider. The technology is provided on a subscription basis or a monthly flat-rate rental. The provider supplies the hardware, software, and service, while the company uses the technology as needed.
Advantages:
- No initial investments: Instead of purchasing the entire technology, the company pays regularly for the service, leading to significantly lower capital binding.
- Flexibility: The company can quickly add additional devices as needed or return technology that is no longer required. Upgrades and adjustments are usually made without major investments.
- Agility: The “as a Service” model allows for rapid scalability and adaptation of the infrastructure without lengthy investment or conversion processes. This gives companies the necessary flexibility to respond to short-term changes.
- Risk transfer: One of the biggest advantages of “as a Service” contracts is the transfer of risk to the service provider. Maintenance, repairs, upgrades, and often even the failure of the technology are covered by the provider. Especially in economically challenging times, when companies may have fewer resources for repairs or unexpected expenses, this can be a significant relief. Additionally, the continuous updating of technology ensures that companies never have to work with outdated equipment, minimising the risk of availability interruptions.
- Cost transparency and planning security: The rental model provides a clear monthly or annual cost structure, simplifying budget planning and allowing companies to accurately calculate their expenses. This planning security is particularly important in times of uncertainty and change.
Disadvantages:
- Long-term costs: In the long run, the monthly or annual fees can exceed the one-time acquisition costs, increasing the overall cost of the solution. However, considering all (often hidden) internal costs and personnel efforts over the years, the models are generally balanced in terms of price.
- Dependence on the provider: Companies rely on the service and availability of the provider, which can lead to challenges in cases of outages or problems.
- Limited access: Compared to traditional acquisition, the company has less access to the technology since they do not own it.
Conclusion: Which model is right?
The choice between the traditional project approach and an “as a Service” model largely depends on the specific requirements and goals of a company. Those who prefer long-term investments and full access may continue to favour the traditional model. For companies seeking solution availability, flexibility, lower initial investments, and worry-free maintenance, “as a Service” contracts offer an attractive alternative.
In economically challenging times, “as a Service” models also offer significant advantages in terms of agility, flexibility, and risk management, which can help many companies better adapt to unforeseen market conditions and minimise financial and operational risks.
To transition an organisation to an AV as a Service model, some preparations and possibly internal structural changes are usually required. The larger the company, the more sensible it often is to gradually convert individual locations or departments rather than immediately aiming for a new overall solution. We are also happy to assist you with advice during this phase.
You may also be interested in:
